![]() |
Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2013
From Shared Risk to Shared Value: the Business Case for Disaster Risk Reduction |
|
|
|
Infrastructure provides services, utilities and linkages, which allow cities to function and indeed present lifelines for business and community. Infrastructure networks are often large, complex and interdependent systems, meaning that failure in one network can compromise the entire system. A good example of how PPPs can reduce risks to infrastructure networks was highlighted in the 4 September 2010 and 22 February 2011 earthquakes near Christchurch, New Zealand, which caused damage of US$4 billion and US$12 billion, respectively. The Christchurch Engineering Lifelines Study (Christchurch Engineering Lifelines Group 1997) undertaken in the 1990s, addressed a range of hazards including earthquakes, snow and wind-storms, flooding and tsunamis. A key feature of the project was the wide involvement of engineers and managers from utility organisations, including local authorities, and private and public companies. After the study, Christchurch’s utility companies built disaster risk management into their daily business practices. Interorganisational collaboration was facilitated and formalized through the Canterbury Lifeline Utilities Group. These efforts paid off when the earthquakes struck. Thanks to investments in reinforcement before the earthquakes, the Port of Littleton was able to resume operations within days—despite heavy damages to the port and major losses owing to demolished commercial buildings. Telecommunications buildings that had also been reinforced were able to continue to operate. Most bridges had been retrofitted by Christchurch City Council and the New Zealand Transport Agency and successfully survived the quakes; and US$6 million of investment in seismic strengthening work by Orion, the local electricity distribution company, saved more than US$65 million in direct losses. In contrast, residential losses were high owing to Christchurch’s history of land-use decisions, which allowed development on land susceptible to liquefaction, lateral-spreading and subsidence in the event of earthquakes. Box 8.12 PPPs in Canterbury, New Zealand
(Source:
Johnston, 2012 Johnston, D. 2012.,The Value of Seismic Risk Mitigation in Canterbury, New Zealand.. Click here to view this GAR paper. 139
sorbing rainfall water and reducing the inflow into urban drainage systems (Figure 8.7). Green roofs are symptomatic of the new value proposition in urban development. They can reduce energy costs, improve air quality, reduce flood risks, mitigate urban heat islands and contribute aesthetic and environmental values to urban areas.
These innovations are happening as part of a renewed recognition of the role of urban design and planning to produce urban spaces that are not only attractive and functional but also social, sustainable and safe (Soja, 1996; Sassen, 2010). They are taking place not only in large global cities such as New York or Tokyo or in high-income countries, but also in low-income countries, such as in Bhutan, for example (Box 8.11).
In the Republic of Korea, the national government has developed tax policies and other financial incentives to reduce private investors’ uncertainty and stimulate public-private partnerships (PPPs) for urban green growth (OECD, 2012
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2012.,OECD Roundtable of Mayors and Ministers: Mobilising investments for urban sustainability, job creation and resilient growth. Issue Paper., Chicago, Illinois,USA.. . veloped in its First Five-Year Action Plan for Green Growth of 2009 and include construction subsidies, compensation for base cost and infrastructure credit guarantees (Ibid.).
Such examples show that business will invest in green urban infrastructure when the right incentives, mainly associated with cost recovery and competitive pricing, are provided (Johannessen et al., 2013
Johannessen, A. Rosemarin, A. Gerger Swartling, A. Han, G. Vulturius, G and Stenström, T.A. 2013.,Linking Investment Decisions with Disaster Risk Reduction in Water Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH): The Role of the Public and Private Sectors, Potentials for Partnership and Social Learning., Background Paper prepared for the 2013 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction., Geneva,Switzerland:UNISDR.. . Karlsson, A. 2012.,Innovative Approaches to Address DRR Implementation in Cities. Sustainability Certification of Urban Areas and Opportunities to Integrate Resilience and DRR., Presentation at the Seminar 25 May 2012 on “Resilient cities - From knowledge to local action” Convened by the Swedish Water House cluster group for Water and Disaster Risk Reduction. 2013-01-16.. . Johannessen, A. Rosemarin, A. Gerger Swartling, A. Han, G. Vulturius, G and Stenström, T.A. 2013.,Linking Investment Decisions with Disaster Risk Reduction in Water Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH): The Role of the Public and Private Sectors, Potentials for Partnership and Social Learning., Background Paper prepared for the 2013 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction., Geneva,Switzerland:UNISDR.. . A good example of a certification programme is
|
|